Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 10
1
The Longbranch / Re: The "Card Game"
« Last post by Russ T Chambers on Yesterday at 11:32:22 PM »
If'n the ones in the cages stay healthy, we can always eat the spares!  Picks up a large coop of birds and adds it to the pot.  If we deep fry 'em, toss 'em in hot sauce and call 'em Bufflo Wings! ;D ;D ;D ;D   By the way, anyone know how to carve Coyote.   ??? ??? ???
2
The Darksider's Den / Re: How did we get these "Calibers"?
« Last post by Hair Trigger Jim on Yesterday at 11:12:24 PM »
Quote from: FriscoCounty on Yesterday at 10:19:12 PM

The next cartridge in the series was the .38 Long from UMC.  It was a .38" heeled bullet cartridge...

The came the .38 Long Colt. It was used in the Colt M1892 revolver.  This black powder cartridge was internally lubed...

While this sequence of development is correct, historically, the names ".38 Long" vs ".38 Long Colt" (as you probably know) didn't necessarily distinguish between the heeled and inside-lubricated cartridges.  For example, I have a 3/4 full box by Winchester (still sealed on one side) labeled "38 Cal. Long Center Fire" with headstamps reading "W.R.A.Co. .38 LONG", but loaded with inside-lubricated, not heeled, bullets.  Of course, if you look at the end of the box, not the top, you'd think the cartridge is called "38 Cal. Colts. C. F."  And if anybody can explain the period after "Colts", please let me know!
3
The Darksider's Den / Re: How did we get these "Calibers"?
« Last post by FriscoCounty on Yesterday at 10:19:12 PM »
Let's start with the 1851 Colt.  It was a .36 caliber pistol because the convention was to use the bore size of .36".  The groove was about .375" and the cylinder bore diameter was .380" (this is for originals not modern copies). So far so good?  Now, when cartridge conversions came about, the rear of the cylinder was milled off and than was it.  The cartridges used heeled bullets so the case diameter, the bullet, and the cylinder bore were all .38". 

The first cartridge was the .38 Colt for use in 1851 and 1861 conversions.  The name was based on the diameter of the bullet.  It was later renamed the .38 Short Colt. 

The next cartridge in the series was the .38 Long from UMC.  It was a .38" heeled bullet cartridge with the case lengthened to allow more powder capacity and was developed by UMC for Colt's Newline revolvers and centerfire conversions of the 1851 and 1861 Colt revolvers requested by the US Navy.  Because it was developed for this contract was also known as the .38 Navy.

The came the .38 Long Colt. It was used in the Colt M1892 revolver.  This black powder cartridge was internally lubed.  As such the diameter of the bullet was now the same as the inside diameter of the case and not the outside.  Its bullet diameter was now .357".  The case of the .38LC was 0.14" longer than the .38L to allow the case to cover the lube grooves and still have the same overall length and powder capacity.  This was also known as the .38 Army.

After the .38 Long Colt came the S&W .38 Special.  The case was again lengthened to 1.15" and reduced in diameter to .379".  It was transitional in that it was introduced just before smokeless became common and was loaded with smokeless soon after it introduction.

Next came the Remington .357 Magnum.  The case was lengthened again and was a true smokeless cartridge.
4
The Longbranch / Re: The "Card Game"
« Last post by Major E A Sterner on Yesterday at 07:07:33 PM »
Gunna need a bunch more of the tiny birds to make a meal.
Major throws in a couple dead rattlesnakes to fill the pot out some.
5
The Darksider's Den / Re: .45 Cowboy Special
« Last post by Coffinmaker on Yesterday at 06:53:34 PM »

 :)  YEPPER  ;)

YESSIREE ... BOB.  PLASTICS could be a real serious boon or is it Boom.  There is a Canadian out fit has developed a process for making Building Blocks that are sort of like Lego(tm) blocks.  Primary material is recycled plastics.  Any color, ground up fine and mix'd with a touch of concrete.  Strong as hell, cheaper than building a house with wood, and with packaging, an endless supply of raw material.  Good tip there MAKO.  May have to think an investment.

I also have a real nifty set of .45 Conversions, built on 1860esque Pietta frames.  Currently have three separate barrel sets for 'em.  Set 'em up with ACP Cylinders so I could shoot ACP cases and C45S cases interchangeably.  Works a treat and loaded with 130Gr Barnstormer bullets, recoil is on par with Suppository .38s.  Super FUN!!
6
The Longbranch / Re: The "Card Game"
« Last post by Coffinmaker on Yesterday at 06:39:54 PM »

Coffinmaker Checks.  Are the birds to be roasted or fried ???
7
The Longbranch / Re: The "Card Game"
« Last post by Russ T Chambers on Yesterday at 05:46:34 PM »
Russ wants see the 2 legged coyote!  On the way in brings several bird cages with a canary in each one.  Announces to everyone that if they they see any of the birds keel over, yell out and run like hell.  ::) ::) ::)
8
The Darksider's Den / Re: .45 Cowboy Special
« Last post by Mako on Yesterday at 04:02:54 PM »
Quote from: StrawHat on April 27, 2024, 06:52:27 AM

I posted on another forum and got this reply,

Quote from: Roy G. Jinks;141985502

"The S&W spec. sheet date 1918 list the rifling as 6 grooves and one turn in 15 inched. I hope that helps. They list all the spec.s if you need them."  Roy

Kevin

Stawhat,
Thanks, but that is just the twist rate and the direction. The standard 1911 twist rate was  1:16 and a LEFT hand twist.  We changed it to Right Hand so the torque of the bullet traveling down the barrel would rotate towards the right as the shooter looks at it, thus pushing it INTO the hand since most shooters are right handed and you are able to control it better.  Now almost all 1911 barrels are Right Hand twist.

Which direction was the rifling twist on the S&Ws?  Actually the twist rate and the direction are not that interesting to me, the bore and groove dimensions are what everyone has been talking about on this subject.  On this thread, it has been stated the S&W 1917s had rifling for hardball which insinuates shallower grooves for jacketed bullets.  Because of that "hardball" bore some were advising soft lead bullets didn't do well.

A 1 inch difference in rotation per foot is not enough to of a difference to cause any measurable difference because of soft lead bullets, and the twist direction has no influence.  Where did the Roy Jinks quote come from? I have his "History of S&W". I don't have his "Smith and Wesson, 1857-1945 A Handbook For Collectors" or the books put out by the Smith & Wesson Collectors Association, perhaps it appeared there?

Does someone have the actual dimensions?  They will be something like this:


I've posted what I have measured on 1917s, 1950s and 1955s (M25), but I'm curious as to what the official Army Inspection print was that has been suggested as the "standard" we should be discussing.  Or even what Roy or the Collectors Association says the original S&W prints stated.

Thanks for that information, what else can you find?

~Mako
9
The Longbranch / Re: The "Card Game"
« Last post by DeaconKC on Yesterday at 02:25:39 PM »
Deacon sees two feet sticking out from under the ACME Air Filtration Unit and relaxes when he realizes it is just a coyote...

...grabs a cup of coffee..."Who else needs some?"
10
The Longbranch / Re: The "Card Game"
« Last post by Russ T Chambers on Yesterday at 01:58:15 PM »
Russ checks on the status of the saloon, and finds it is still standing.  He has brought a casino-size air filtration unit to avoid future biohazards, then realizes there is no electricity in town yet  ::) ::), so it is nothing more than a big paper weight!  So, he tosses it in the pot.  :o :o :o
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 10
SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk
© 1995 - 2023 CAScity.com